Kolkata Court August 2013 Judgments
Browse smarter
Open an 18-section brief on any judgment
Structured AI Brief in seconds on any result - plus Semantic Search when you need meaning, not just keywords.
- AI Brief & Ask
- Semantic AI Search
- Devil's Bench
Credentials emailed - log in to pick up where you left off.
Naini Plywood Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Markendeya Plywood Pvt. Ltd.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-27-2013
ORDER SHEET CS No.314 of 2002 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE NAINI PLYWOOD PVT.LTD.Versus MARKENDEYA PLYWOOD PVT.LTD.BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE SOUMEN SEN Date :27. h August, 2013. Ms.Siddiqua Parveen, Adv..for the plaintiff Mr.Chayan Gupta, Adv.Mr.Rajesh Upadhyay, Adv..for the defendant The Court: The written statement filed by the defendant contains various defects as pointed out by the Master and Official Referee in his report dated 23rd August, 2013 and the Advocates-on-Record on behalf of the defendant seems to have taken no steps to remove such defects. This Court has noticed that a practice has developed that the Advocateson-Record for the parties are not following the procedure prescribed in the Original Side Rules of this Court and they are let off for their negligent conduct on a misplaced philanthropy shown by the Court. The written statement appears to have been filed on 11th November, 2011 with as many as eight defects. Th...
Srei Equipment Finance Private Limited Vs. M/S. Classic Super Construc ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-27-2013
AP No.279 of 2013 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE SREI EQUIPMENT FINANCE PRIVATE LIMITED Versus M/S.CLASSIC SUPER CONSTRUCTION & ORS.BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE SANJIB BANERJEE Date :27. h August, 2013. Appearance: Mr.Utpal Bose, Adv.The Court : The respondents are not represented despite previous service. Pursuant to previous directions, the Receiver has obtained possession of two of the six assets covered by the agreement and offers have been received for only one of the assets. Three of the assets cannot be traced and the final asset, according to the petitioner, is with a third party who claims to have obtained the same for valuable consideration from the respondents. The sale of the Tata truck, which was acquired in the year 2010 at about Rs.18 lakh, is confirmed in favour of Ajit Singh of Ranchi at Rs.6.90 lakh, subject to the entire consideration being paid by way of a demand draft or pay order or like instrument, not being a pers...
The Board of Trustees for the Port,calcutta Vs. Ghatal Steam Navigatio ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-27-2013
ORDER SHEET CS No.422 of 1980 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES FOR THE PORT,CALCUTTA Versus GHATAL STEAM NAVIGATION Co.LTD.& ANR. BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE SOUMEN SEN Date :27. h August, 2013. Appearance: Mr.Dipak Ranjan Mukherjee, Adv..for the plaintif. Mr.Moloy Ghosh, Adv.Mr.Pramit Roy, Adv.Mr.Arindam Mukherjee, Adv.Mrs.M.Sen. Adv..for the defendant no.1. Mr.Ashoke Banerjee Sr.Adv.Mr.Amitava Deb, Adv..for the defendant no.2. The Court: Each of the defendants in the suit in terms of my earlier order had deposited a sum of Rs.45 lacs with the plaintiff by way of a bank draft towards part satisfaction of the amount payable by each of the defendants to the plaintiff. This order was passed on the basis of the calculation furnished by the plaintiff with regard to the arrear rentals and other charges payable by each of the defendants to the plaintiff for availing the services. Mr.Moloy Ghosh, learned Counsel appearing f...
Turner Morrison Limited Vs. National Insurance Company Limited, Divisi ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-27-2013
ORDER SHEET CS No.230 of 2008 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE TURNER MORRISON LIMITED Versus NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED, DIVISION-1 BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE SOUMEN SEN Date :27. h August, 2013. Mr.Jishnu Saha, Adv.Ms.Ahana Sikdar, Adv..for the plaintiff Mr.Arindum Mukherjee, Adv.Mr.Sudeep Pal Choudhury, Adv..for the defendant. The Court: The order dated 21st August, 2013 was passed keeping in mind the order passed by the Honble Supreme Court in MOHAMMAD AHMAD AND ANOTHER Versus ATMA RAM CHAUHAN AND OTHERs.reported clarified in (2011).that for Supreme the Court renewed Cases period, if 755. It there is be further any, the defendant shall be liable to pay not only the municipal rates and taxes but other charges namely, water tax, maintenance charges, electricity charges for the actual consumption of tenanted premises and for any area so that the landlord gets the actual rent of which nothing would be deductible. It is clarified ...
Dina Nath Pandey Vs. State of West Bengal and Others
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-27-2013
ORDER SHEET WP No.825 of 2013 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE DINA NATH PANDEY Versus STATE OF WEST BENGAL AND OTHERS BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE DEBASISH KAR GUPTA Date :27. h August, 2013. Appearance : Mr.Subir Sanyal, Advocate. Mr.Sakti Pada Jana, Advocate. for the petitioner Mr.Jayanta Dasgupta, Advocate. Mr.Balaram Patra, Advocate. for the respdt. Nos.4 to 7. Mr.Manas Sadhu, Advocate. for the State. The Court : This writ application is filed by the petitioner challenging the order of termination dated April 10, 2013 passed by the respondent no.6. By virtue of the impugned order, the service of the petitioner in a non-teaching post (temporary clerk) was terminated. At the outset, a preliminary objection is raised by Mr.Jayanta Dasgupta, learned Advocate appearing on behalf of the respondent Nos.4, 5, 6 and 7. According to Mr.Dasgupta, the school is private school and by virtue of the impugned order, the temporary service of the petiti...
Chugoku Marine Paints (S) Pte. Ltd. Vs. the Owners and Parties Interes ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-27-2013
ORDER SHEET GA No.2371 of 2013 With AS No.7 of 2013 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Admiralty Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE CHUGOKU MARINE PAINTS (S) PTE. LTD.Versus The owners and Parties Interested in the Vessel M.V.Maharishi Vamadeva. & Anr. BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE HARISH TANDON Date :27. h August, 2013. The Court : By an order dated 13th August, 2013 passed in G.A.No.2371 of 2013, the Court passed an order of arrest of the vessel and directed the parties to file affidavits. The plaintiff and the defendant jointly appeared and filed the terms of settlement by saying that the parties have amicably settled the disputes out of Court. The parties jointly submit that the interim order passed on 13th August, 2013 be vacated on the basis of the said terms of settlement. Although the matter is not listed but by the consent of the parties the suit as well as the application is taken on days list. The defendants have admitted the claim of the plaintiff and agreed to pay off the said amount in ...
Appellant Vs. Respondent
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-27-2013
ORDER SHEET C.P.No.381 of 2013 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA ORIGINAL JURISDICTION ORIGINAL SIDE RE: JESSOP & Co.LTD.And DHINGRA ISPAT UDYOG & ORS.BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE HARISH TANDON Date:27. h August, 2013. Appearance: Mr.Sakya Sen, Adv.Mr.Sukrit Mukherjee, Adv.Mr.S.R.Kakrania, Adv.Mr.Sanjeeb Seni, Adv. for the petitioner Mr.Kousik Chatterjee, Adv.Mr.Ruby Jaiswal, Adv. for the company The Court: The petitioning creditor is an unpaid seller. The purchase order was issued by the company on 7th February, 2012 for supply of the material, description and specification whereof are indicated therein. The aforesaid supply was to be made by 11th February, 2012. The petitioning creditor avers that the goods were supplied to the company and the seal and signature appended on the challan would indicate that the goods were received by the company. The purchase order was issued for a supply of 22,100 kgs of the materials whereas the supply is made to the extent of 20370.50 kgs. It is also not...
Srei Equipment Finance Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Mohammad Asif Habibi and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-27-2013
A.P.838 of 2012 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION SREI EQUIPMENT FINANCE PVT.LTD.Versus MOHAMMAD ASIF HABIBI & ANR. BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE SANJIB BANERJEE Date:27. h August, 2013. Appearance: Mr.Satarup Banerjee, Adv.Mr.Shib Shankar Banerjee, Adv.Ms.Rituparna Majumder, Adv.The Court: The respondents are upto the usual gimmick of not paying and building up a long-winded argument without any substance. There is a sum in excess of Rs.97 lakh due on account of defaulted instalments and the respondents cannot demonstrate that the position is otherwise. There are several assets that are in possession of the respondents and the respondents are unable to accede to the offer of Court for a sum of Rs.50 lakh to be deposited in a separate account for the accounts between the parties to be gone into. The petitioner says that the respondents had been represented at the initial stage but were not represented for some time. According to the petitioner, the hearin...
Auroma Coke Ltd. and anr. Vs. Coal India Ltd. and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-27-2013
WP No.72 of 2010 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE AUROMA COKE LTD.& ANR. Versus COAL INDIA LTD.& ORS.BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE I.P.MUKERJ.Date :27. h August, 2013. Appearance: Mr.Saptangshu Basu, Sr.Advocate MRS.Shukla Banerjee, Advocate for the petitioner Mr.Shaktinath Mukherjee, Sr.Advocate Mr.Kalimuddin Mondal, Advocate for the respondents The Court: The writ petitioner company (writ petitioner.) is a manufacturer of washed coal.It obtains its raw material of coke from the fourth respondent, Bharat Coking Coal Ltd (respondent.).The dispute in this case spans a limited period of time between May 2008 and July of that year. Thereafter, with effect from 1st August, 2008 the parties entered into a fuel supply agreement dated 31st July, 2008. The quantity of coal supplied by the respondent to the writ petitioner, in May, 2008 was 3,000 metric tonnes whereas in June and July of that year it was 5,000 metric tonnes. The dispute between the part...
Vs. Infar (India) Ltd.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Aug-27-2013
ORDER SHEET I.T.A.No.141 of 1999 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Special Jurisdiction [Income Tax].ORIGINAL SIDE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, WEST BENGAL -IV Versus INFAR (INDIA) LTD.Appellant Respondent BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE INDIRA BANERJEE -AndThe Hon'ble JUSTICE ANINDITA ROY SARASWATI Date :27. h August, 2013. For Appellant : Md.Nizamuddin, Adv.For Respondent : Mr.Siddhartha Das, Adv.The respondent is a pharmaceutical company engaged in manufacture of drugs and other pharmaceutical products. The disputes in the instant case relate to disallowance of travelling expenses of Rs.3,20,000/- under Rule 6D of the Income Tax Rules, 1962. Admittedly, the assessee did not file the details of expenses to attract Rule 6D of the Income Tax Rules. The assessee showed an amount of Rs.70,000/- as disallowable. However, the Assessing Officer disallowed Rs.3,20,000/-. The assessee appealed. In appeal the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) upheld the disallowance of Rs.3,20,000/-. Against the ord...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »